-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Tony Hain wrote:
Mobile IP, and the multi6 DHT work are attempts to mitigate it through
slight of hand at the IP layer, while SCTP attempts to mask the topology
reality in the transport layer. (These are probably not the only examples,
but they are the ones that come to mind this morning.) Yet none of these
really do the job in all cases.
I totally agree with your current insight that we need to seperate
the routing from the host identifier. IMHO every host should have
one globally unique ID and could have multiple transports, even if
those are IPv4, IPv6, IPX or whatever based and going over multiple
links or not. Though we should limit to IP based protocols to not
make it too complicated. Such a mechanism could solve problems for:
"site-locals" constructions, multihoming, mobile-ip without hindering
the size of the routing table as people could continue to use current
routing, thus TLA based and fully aggregated to the TLA level in the GRT.
I've been looking into this since the very heated debate about site-locals.
As imho there might be a way to solve that in the same problem too.
Though I am still conducting research on that topic. As far as it stands
I think that HIP is going the best way there is. LIN6 is flawed as it
won't scale and can't be deployed easily. Next to those I got my
own odd idea and I will probably work it out and implement it as a proof
of concept. Though timing on when and how may be completely unknown.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: Unfix PGP for Outlook Alpha 13 Int.
Comment: Jeroen Massar / jeroen(_at_)unfix(_dot_)org / http://unfix.org/~jeroen/
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----